FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[f1ea]

Ruthless yes. Take chances yes. Wee wee on your team mate. Nah, devalues the win.

Not if the situation is made clear. wee weeing is not the same as doing what's best for the team regardless of what the individual feels about it. Nobody questions HRT or Sauber for wee weeing on de la Rosa...

Maybe it devalues the win... but the pt count is still the same. So whatever value they're after, must still there regardless of what others think. Other teams do it, other teams have done it, Ferrari has done it before... i think each team knows and decides what to value. Like it or not.

[What's Burning?]

Yes every team has done it in some degree, it's simply that Ferrari does it so much more flagrantly and then they claim the righteousness of their action in defense.

Because it's not enough to simply win.

...But I don't have the glasses.

[f1ea]

Yes every team has done it in some degree, it's simply that Ferrari does it so much more flagrantly and then they claim the righteousness of their action in defense.

Because it's not enough to simply win.

...But I don't have the glasses.

But there you go... the rule dont talk about flagrancy. Massa pouting or doing it in all smiles does not make the rule more or less broken.

In fact, the decision doesnt even have to be the right one in the end. They simply felt it was AT THE MOMENT. And they're the ones who have to consider what's enough for them. Not us.

[What's Burning?]

Yes every team has done it in some degree, it's simply that Ferrari does it so much more flagrantly and then they claim the righteousness of their action in defense.

Because it's not enough to simply win.

...But I don't have the glasses.

But there you go... the rule dont talk about flagrancy. Massa pouting or doing it in all smiles does not make the rule more or less broken.

In fact, the decision doesnt even have to be the right one in the end. They simply felt it was AT THE MOMENT. And they're the ones who have to consider what's enough for them. Not us.

But it's the reason the stewards fines them and they hadn't fined anyone else for doing just the same thing... you spent quite a bit of time claiming in Ferrari's defense that they were being singled out because everyone has done it.

I think it's a stupid unenforceable rule as well, but Ferrari aren't just content to pay the fine and moving on, they threaten the governing bodies.

[texasmr2]

There are issues I have with certain decisions aswell but I despise the fact that some fans think their team (and driver ) are any different. I like fair play on and off the track but the 'off track bs' is the least of my concerns .
I try to play fair but some here make it very difficult simply because they do not know how too play well with others, as if their candy bar was taken.

Yes every team has done it in some degree, it's simply that Ferrari does it so much more flagrantly and then they claim the righteousness of their action in defense.

Because it's not enough to simply win.

...But I don't have the glasses.

But there you go... the rule dont talk about flagrancy. Massa pouting or doing it in all smiles does not make the rule more or less broken.

In fact, the decision doesnt even have to be the right one in the end. They simply felt it was AT THE MOMENT. And they're the ones who have to consider what's enough for them. Not us.

What we have here is distinctly biased opinion's but we know who is right .

[f1ea]

But it's the reason the stewards fines them and they hadn't fined anyone else for doing just the same thing... you spent quite a bit of time claiming in Ferrari's defense that they were being singled out because everyone has done it.

I think it's a stupid unenforceable rule as well, but Ferrari aren't just content to pay the fine and moving on, they threaten the governing bodies.

Of course. The stewards can fine them all they want. They dont have to provide "utter proof". but in order to come up with some of the fines that were suggested, the WSMC should have provided SOLID evidence, and a credible precedent of stuff and punishment that has been enforeced before in similar situations.

IF the WSMC dealt extraordinary punishement based on driver pout... then Ferrari were in their whole right to challenge.
That's the only reason they threatened the bodies.

Again, for us, either we like it or not. Legal stuff is much more complex than a stop-go penalty. You cant just fine someone or disqualify a team based on driver pout. The fact was, there was no direct order for Massa to do anything. It shows more of a flaw in the ruling than anything else... but that's the same excuse the other teams that have done it use to receive no punishment as well.

[racechick]

Ruthless yes. Take chances yes. Wee wee on your team mate. Nah, devalues the win.

Maybe, but you can't really judge it like that, say Alonso's win in Bahrain, Vettel broke down and he inherited the win, is it less impressive than Singapore, yeah. But when the championship points are totalled up, the one with the most wins it and deserves it more than the others who competed.

Im not quite sure what you mean. An inheited win by a competitor breaking down, or a loss of a win due to your own breakdown, well thats just luck, its not manufactured. But Im not sure if thats what you meant?

Yeah, thats what I meant, but sometimes teams and drives manufacture their own "luck", was Jenson lucky in Australia? Yeah, but he took the gamble, was Lewis unlucky in Singapore, yeah but he took the gamble.

Was Alonso "lucky" that the team decided to get Massa to move over (and Massa unlucky?), sort off, but he also put himself in the position where he was stronger than his team mate in the WDC, and Massa had himself in the position of points wise being fairly behind his team mate, without much indication he'll catch up and out preforming to the extent the team needed for the WDC.

Was there not a lot of skill in winning that race? Not anything stand out (compared to normal f1 race winning standards), but the same can be said for Bahrain or when a driver with the fastest car gets on pole and runs away with the win.

I think I understand where you're coming from here, but for me its different.
The breakdown, team error, driver error-all frustrating but c'est la vie. Being crashed into/knocked out by another driver, thats even more annoying, but if its clearly an accidnet then its part and parcel of racing and you win some you lose some (I dont mean deliberate punting off-Schumacher style,thats a different thing). But the team orders when the other guy is still in with a shout, for me that crosses a line, its like stealing.
If you crash, have a car failure etc, its not nice and its a bad feeling, like say when you loose £20. But if you have the £20 stolen from you, its worse. Thats the closest I can explain how I feel about it, Massa and Smedley were clearly unhappy with it too.

[smokin]

Ruthless yes. Take chances yes. Wee wee on your team mate. Nah, devalues the win.

Maybe, but you can't really judge it like that, say Alonso's win in Bahrain, Vettel broke down and he inherited the win, is it less impressive than Singapore, yeah. But when the championship points are totalled up, the one with the most wins it and deserves it more than the others who competed.

Im not quite sure what you mean. An inheited win by a competitor breaking down, or a loss of a win due to your own breakdown, well thats just luck, its not manufactured. But Im not sure if thats what you meant?

Yeah, thats what I meant, but sometimes teams and drives manufacture their own "luck", was Jenson lucky in Australia? Yeah, but he took the gamble, was Lewis unlucky in Singapore, yeah but he took the gamble.

Was Alonso "lucky" that the team decided to get Massa to move over (and Massa unlucky?), sort off, but he also put himself in the position where he was stronger than his team mate in the WDC, and Massa had himself in the position of points wise being fairly behind his team mate, without much indication he'll catch up and out preforming to the extent the team needed for the WDC.

Was there not a lot of skill in winning that race? Not anything stand out (compared to normal f1 race winning standards), but the same can be said for Bahrain or when a driver with the fastest car gets on pole and runs away with the win.

I think I understand where you're coming from here, but for me its different.
The breakdown, team error, driver error-all frustrating but c'est la vie. Being crashed into/knocked out by another driver, thats even more annoying, but if its clearly an accidnet then its part and parcel of racing and you win some you lose some (I dont mean deliberate punting off-Schumacher style,thats a different thing). But the team orders when the other guy is still in with a shout, for me that crosses a line, its like stealing.
If you crash, have a car failure etc, its not nice and its a bad feeling, like say when you loose £20. But if you have the £20 stolen from you, its worse. Thats the closest I can explain how I feel about it, Massa and Smedley were clearly unhappy with it too.

Especially since I just know that you were going to put that £20 on Alonso to win in Singapore.

[racechick]

Ruthless yes. Take chances yes. Wee wee on your team mate. Nah, devalues the win.

Maybe, but you can't really judge it like that, say Alonso's win in Bahrain, Vettel broke down and he inherited the win, is it less impressive than Singapore, yeah. But when the championship points are totalled up, the one with the most wins it and deserves it more than the others who competed.

Im not quite sure what you mean. An inheited win by a competitor breaking down, or a loss of a win due to your own breakdown, well thats just luck, its not manufactured. But Im not sure if thats what you meant?

Yeah, thats what I meant, but sometimes teams and drives manufacture their own "luck", was Jenson lucky in Australia? Yeah, but he took the gamble, was Lewis unlucky in Singapore, yeah but he took the gamble.

Was Alonso "lucky" that the team decided to get Massa to move over (and Massa unlucky?), sort off, but he also put himself in the position where he was stronger than his team mate in the WDC, and Massa had himself in the position of points wise being fairly behind his team mate, without much indication he'll catch up and out preforming to the extent the team needed for the WDC.

Was there not a lot of skill in winning that race? Not anything stand out (compared to normal f1 race winning standards), but the same can be said for Bahrain or when a driver with the fastest car gets on pole and runs away with the win.

I think I understand where you're coming from here, but for me its different.
The breakdown, team error, driver error-all frustrating but c'est la vie. Being crashed into/knocked out by another driver, thats even more annoying, but if its clearly an accidnet then its part and parcel of racing and you win some you lose some (I dont mean deliberate punting off-Schumacher style,thats a different thing). But the team orders when the other guy is still in with a shout, for me that crosses a line, its like stealing.
If you crash, have a car failure etc, its not nice and its a bad feeling, like say when you loose £20. But if you have the £20 stolen from you, its worse. Thats the closest I can explain how I feel about it, Massa and Smedley were clearly unhappy with it too.

Especially since I just know that you were going to put that £20 on Alonso to win in Singapore.

Of course

[vaptin]

By all means its a terrible feeling for Massa, I actually thought it'd be counter productive and knocked his confidence so much that his lack of performance and hence taking points from over title contenders would over-come the advantage Alonso got (points wise, and mentally) from the switch. Of course this is what Luca di Montmozelo (sp) is alluding to, Massa is still expected to give it his all for the team, regardless of his personal feelings. I think Massa has reacted strongly anyway, he wants to prove hes no slouch and no pushover.

But he's an employee of Ferrari, I bet in his contract he isn't a de-facto No.2 (like Rubens was) but it says something along the lines of the team can choose to favour one driver if they feel the other can't compete for the championship. Of course, normally favouritism/team orders happens subtlety, Mark/Vettel's front wing scenario, in that case Redbull had the policy of favouring whichever driver was ahead in the WDC, but sometimes you have to hit it with a hammer.

[darwin dali]

[texasmr2]

Mmmmm pain is such an evil mistress .

[f1ea]

Sir Stirling Moss:

Now, I know that if Ferrari does take the title there will be plenty of people who will flag up the team-orders controversy at the German Grand Prix and label the championship tainted. But I don't agree with that at all. I'll admit that the way Ferrari handled that affair was pretty poor, but I think in the future there will be a much more liberal ruling on team orders and we will look back at the 2010 German Grand Prix as an irregularity in the rules, rather than anything more sinister on Ferrari's part.

[pilotfriend]

This is not complicated. Massa will have to crash when asked, to help Alonso win a race!

[billindenver]

Nah, he'll have to do what Button is doing for Hamilton. Refuse to pass him and push like mad if its possible to catch and slow up a championship rival. Nothing new here.